There's a process called ROTOSCOPING, by which animation is drawn over footage of live actors. It was invented in 1917 and allows for subtle, lifelike movement, making it especially useful for dance sequences. Disney is simply recycling their old rotoscope footage and backgrounds.

When you're a real animation fiend the way I am, it's fun to revisit those old Disney films and trying to spot the rotoscoped sequences. Also Betty Boop cartoons make use of it occasionally. Ralph Bakshi films as well.

The copyage probably has to do with when they started using Xerox for transferring drawings onto cells when they made 101 Dalmatians. From there I guess they decided to copy animation of older movies that way and alter it to save money. Most blatant case of this is in Robin Hood's Phony King of England song, it's like "Guess the Movie" there.

Yup. This is indicative of the period in Disney animation in the 60's - 70's starting with 101 Dalmatians and ending with The Fox and the Hound. The animators got lazy and started to use a similiar, lower quality style for all their animated films, reusing character models, etc.

The Sword in the Stone is the worst of all. I swear... That movie has 2 completely different voice actors as the main character ( That or the Actor went from being age 10 to 25 during the acting process). Also they reuse the EXACT same sound clip of Arthur stumbling going "Woah what... WOAH!" 8 times throughout the movie.

What's with all the people jumping all up on this Ebaum's bandwagon? I haven't been to that sh*t site in over a year, so I'd never even know that he could have gotten it from there. Of course, he linked HIS source, and it wasn't Ebaums, so get off Baumans c*ck and let this guy post his YTMND. Bauman's got his high-priced lawyers to fight his fights, he doesn't need you fanboys and YTMND doesn't need ebaum's fanboys here either.

And actually, they even use the same footage twice just in Sword In The Stone by itself! When Wart runs, then trips. It's the same freaking animation, just a different background! Not only did they recycle animation, but even within the same bloody movie!

This is great, they did the same thing for Beauty and the Beast, taking the dance sequence from Cinderella, since they ran over budget on Beauty, they needed to save time.
Recycle; Its good for the planet, and most people won't notice in your animations.

2'd. Why? I've seen this observation before, you did not discover this. But, you took the effort to make a YTMND out of it, and somehow make it to the front page. Sorry for linking to ebaumsworld, but: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/tags/disney-copies/

Wow, lol. 5'd. Oh and by the way, I want to know how some of you f*gs even know this is on ebaum? I never, ever go there so I wouldn't know...same as the site creator. You guys fail for visiting that lame site.

It is dumb that some people are saying Disney is lazy for reusing some animations. They probably just rotoscoped over real actors and just reused it. Why waste money and time filming more footage of the same exact thing? Even moreso, why should someone even care? Funny ytmnd but Disney certaintly doesn't suck because of stuff like this.

An animation company, cutting corners by re-using animatics to save money?! NO!! IT CAN'T BE!! SAY IT AIN'T SO! If only every other profitable animation company in the world didn't do it then this might be news.

I don't see these things as diminishing these movies... Winnie the Pooh, Sword in the Stone, and the Jungle Book all deserve their status as classic animation.
So what if they reused some animation? Pfft. There are some cartoons out now that reuse animation constantly and nobody's childhood has been hurt...

they call it limited animation... you can find it everywhere if you look for it. Especially TV shows. hanna barbera actually managed to stay afloat during an animation bust period because of their constant reusal of animation, and it carried over into plot as well, take for example, Scooby Doo. Also notice how lots of characters wear ties, collars and scarfs as a way to easily conceal disparity between moving and nonmoving cells... real animation costs a sh*tload, or used to